Double Accident - Photos

is that off that stupid crane website?

Got loads of them on there

 

where?

 

Oops, theyre both pretty f**ked then

 

i wanna know where the bloke standing on the side of the truck operating the crane went?!

 

Doh

 

fantastic

 

Was it really worth the crane concidering what car it was though.

 

thats not real surely?!

 

F**K me thats funny

 

Humdinger !




As a (ahem ) qualified HIAB operator, I can see the problems here.

1) The biggest problem - he doesn't have the side stabilizers extended.
2) The recovery vehicle is parked at an inappropriate angle/ position for the lift, he should be further forward and side-on to the job.
3) I believe he has probably failed to take into account the weight of the water in the Fiesta.

If he didn't hurt himself in the accident, I'm sure the operator's boss would have given him his nuts in a sling anyway. What a d*ck.

 

Thats excellent!

 

As a qualified HIAB operator i suggest you go and retake your license and have your eyes tested.

If you look carefully he does have the stabilisers extended. The problem is that he has parked so close to the edge that all of the force from the weight of the car/water and lorry is going onto such a tiny surface area seeing as the stabiliser foot is actually on the edge of the dock.

It is simple physics and mechanics that if he is to support the weight of such a vehicle and the amount of water it may contain then the stabiliser should be on a much larger area, instead of concentrating all of the mass from the lorry itself aswell as what it is lifting onto a unsupported wall.

Simple really, he should be fired.

 

its a pug 206 durrr


alix

 

actually guys its neither.

I cannot tell what it is but its def neither of them.

I know cos the delivery vans i used to drive are fiestas and 206s and they look nothing like them.

 

crane accidents?

http://www.craneaccidents.com/

Matt

 

I thought it was a Corolla

 

Do you think the "thing" arrowed in Pic 1 is a stabliliser? Pic 2 shows that one stabiliser is extended, but I don't think fully, as the vehicle falls into the water. Whenever you use a HIAB, both stabilisers should be fully extended.

Personally, I think there is no problem with positioning the stabiliser on the wall, as it is the only truly solid surface in the immediate area, and it is clearly a substantial construction as its job is to hold the sea back. That said, he should have used a plate under (both) the stabilisers to spread the load. Another big problem is the positioning of the vehicle, ie it's angle to the job.

To be honest, I think the major problem is that the crane is over its lifting capacity for the job. However, had the operator parked at the correct angle and used the stabilisers as directed, the crane would have automatically "locked out" and not allowed the operator to lift any further. The crane wouldn't have fallen over then.

In my professional opinion

 

I think its a ladder not a stabiliser!

 

So what happened to the drivers of both vehicles?

 

Even if both stabilisers had been extended it would of made no difference due to the way he has decided to lift the vehicle, all the force is going to be exerted on the trucks right hand side. I agree with you that he is more than likely over the lifting limit, and therefore should have not even attempted it.

Placing such a large load on a tiny surface is like putting a needle into butter and telling someone to stand on it, but not sink into the butter.

The sea wall is designed in such a way that it can absorb lateral impacts and pressures. It is not designed to withstand great pressures being asserted on it from above and thus making the wall "buckle" due to its material strength being compromised.

That said the bloke in the pictures operating the crane is an obvious pratt and should be thrown in the sea along with his lorry.

Or shot.